IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uta] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-uta-smtp-require-tls-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Viktor Dukhovni <viktor@dukhovni.org> Thu, 28 February 2019 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <viktor@dukhovni.org>
X-Original-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9FC0130EA7; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:08:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aW2lU_MrhNUo; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:08:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from straasha.imrryr.org (straasha.imrryr.org [100.2.39.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C379B1279E6; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:08:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.200.0.109] (unknown [8.2.105.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by straasha.imrryr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 654E0315EE; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 19:08:55 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
From: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor@dukhovni.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-fG3JqY2G_gNmaEkzTnwcry6Q_FjnqKv+2pd3uHdtZWzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 19:08:53 -0500
Cc: draft-ietf-uta-smtp-require-tls@ietf.org, uta@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Reply-To: uta@ietf.org, draft-ietf-uta-smtp-require-tls@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, uta-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <963A770B-1DC6-4DFB-9605-300A0D7AD0CF@dukhovni.org>
References: <155072491254.20210.15187912705241578950.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7061cefb-0f2d-5257-e10c-95be14a7413f@bluepopcorn.net> <20190227201137.GS53396@kduck.mit.edu> <CAKKJt-fG3JqY2G_gNmaEkzTnwcry6Q_FjnqKv+2pd3uHdtZWzQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: uta-chairs@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uta/WJK8XRs_3XlGXwotaQRH41ntofM>
Subject: Re: [Uta] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-uta-smtp-require-tls-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: uta@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: UTA working group mailing list <uta.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/uta/>
List-Post: <mailto:uta@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:09:00 -0000

> On Feb 27, 2019, at 5:00 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Not my ballot thread, but "TLS Required: no" is a LOT clearer to me. I'm not the target audience, but the original order screws me up every time I see it in a ballot e-mail. 

That's a bike-shed colour I for one can happily live with, and for
the record, as a matter of english grammar, you're probably right
that it conveys the intent a bit more clearly.  So I would not
stand in the way of tweaking the header name if there's consensus
around that.

The header is primarily for machine consumption, so the value is
not important so long as it is understood by all the MTAs along
the forward path.  So tweaking for clarity of the description in
the RFC is fine, so long as some name or other attains consensus.

-- 
	Viktor.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email